Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management

Istanbul, Turkey, July 3 – 6, 2012

Noise in the Workplace: Proposal for Decreasing Noise Pollution.

Dimitri Kaliakatsos, Giovanni Mirabelli and Teresa Pizzuti
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Calabria
Arcavacata di Rende, 87036, Italy

Abstract

The noise pollution and its effects have been underestimated in the recent past because they have been considered as
a local disturbing factor only concentrated in restricted fields and in particular areas of work. Nonetheless, today the
noise appears as one of the major causes of life quality decrease. The aim of this article is to define and analyze this
issue from a privileged point of view, considering the consequences of the noise pollution both within a working
environment both within the urban environment in which is located a production system. In detail, this paper
presents the results obtained from the analysis of a company operating in the field of environmental protection and
that performs different activities of screening, sorting and recycling of waste produced in the urban context. For this
company the authors have studied the operating conditions in which the workers perform their work activities,
established the most adapted methodologies and tools indispensable to carry out the noise measurements and
evaluated the existence of hazardous conditions. They present in the last part of the work different operational and
structural solutions capable of contain the risk for the health of the workers and significantly reduce the noise
emissions in the environment.

Keywords
Noise pollution, waste management, environmental protection

1. Introduction
The noise is one of the main factors which negatively characterize the usability of the workplace because of the
physiological damage that it causes to humans and it is one of many occupational diseases from work (Alton, 2001).
The determination of the hazard levels of noise is the result of complex statistical surveys carried out on
representative groups of individuals. ISO/R 1999/1990 (International Organization for Standardization, 1990)
describes the principle generally used to establish the limits of acceptability of noise in industrial environments. This
rule establishes a relationship between the noise exposure in a working environment (in terms of equivalent sound
level, relative to an exposure of 40 hours per week) and the estimate percentage of people exposed to this noise who
have exhibited an increase in increase in hearing threshold greater than or equal to 25 dB. This percentage is
determined as the arithmetic mean on the threshold elevations at frequencies of 500, 1000 and 2000 Hz (Kaliakatsos
et al., 2011). Hearing loss resulting from exposure to noise can not be confused with total or partial deafness
deriving from injury to the auditory nerve. In fact, the hearing loss is characterized by a progressive loss that
develops over several years, generally from 5 to 10 years (Çelik et al., 1998). The audiometric loss is an index of
auditory disability and it is measured as mean value at the frequencies of 500, 1000 and 2000 Hz. Table 1 shows the
disability classification in function of the audiometric loss. Interventions to be implemented in workplaces to protect
people exposed depend on the disability classification. From these configurations derives the formulation of rules,
which aim to reduce the "noise risk" in work activities.

Table 1. Mean value of audiometric loss for frequencies of 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz and relative disability degree
Audiometric loss (dB) Disability Degree
< 25 No
25 - 40 light
40 - 55 medium
> 55 serious

1055
Two different types of hearing damage can be identified depending on the time interval at which the damage occurs:
the "acute injury" that is realized in a short time after a particularly intense stimulation (160-180 dB) and the
"chronic damage" that occurs after a few years as a result of prolonged exposure to high noise levels. In addition,
beside to the hearing damage, the noises exposure causes other effects on humans that are not always directly
connected to it, because: (i) they are not characterized by specific clinical symptoms; (ii) often they are transitional
in nature; (iii) they are mediated by the central nervous system; (iv) they can occur even at low noise intensity; (v)
the medical diagnosis is not readily feasible (Mattei, 1966; Cocchi et al., 1992). The physiological systems directly
affected by the noise, in addition to the auditory system, are:
• Respiratory apparatus. In some subjects, the respiratory rate increases by 10-30% if noise levels exceed 85
dB. This results in an evident reduction in the amount of air that is inhaled and exhaled from the lungs.
• Endocrine system. Some glands such as pituitary, adrenal, thyroid and pancreas are most stimulated.
• Cardiovascular apparatus. When the noise achieves high sound levels, it involves peripheral
vasoconstriction, decreased cardiac output, tachycardia and extrasystoles. In such a context, thresholds of
90 dB are dangerous for workers who already suffer from cardiovascular problems.
• Visual apparatus. Noise exceeding 75 dB reduces the perception of depth of vision and a reduction of the
visual field is present if the noise level exceeds 120 dB.
• Gastrointestinal apparatus. Stomach upsets may occur accompanied by spasms and cramps. In these cases
the stomach is urged to produce more acid secretion by increasing the risk of gastritis, colitis, and duodenal
ulcers.
• Nervous system. The slowdown and alteration of the electrical activity of nerve cells affects both the ability
to react (reducing glare) and the ability to fix the memory (reduction in memory).
• Psychological reactions. Noise may include from a psychological perspective poor concentration, mental
fatigue, insomnia, irritability, intolerance, reduced alertness and, in severe cases, forms of depression.

The analysis carried out highlights the risks related to noise and shows that it is necessary to ensure that sound levels
generated during work activities are contained within the safety limits set by the rules.

2. The Acoustic Quantities

-5 2
The human ear is sensitive to a minimum sound pressure of 20 µPa (2×10 N/m ) and the maximum sound pressure
2 2
that a man can endure without feeling sensations of pain is of 63.2 Pa (1×10 N/m ). In acoustic are used both the
acoustic sound pressure level and the sound power level. Numerically the level of pressure or power is measured in
decibels (dB). G.T. Fletcher (1801-1887) has defined the following quantities:
Sound Intensity Level
(1)

Sound Power Level

(2)

Sound Pressure Level

(3)

where:
2
is the intensity of sound expressed in [W/m ];
-12
is the reference sound intensity conventionally assumed equal to 10 [W/m2];
is the sound power expressed in [W];
-12
is the sound power conventionally assumed equal to 10 [W];
is the sound pressure expressed in [Pa];
is the reference sound pressure conventionally assumed equal to 20 Pa.

1056
The noise in nature is an "unpleasant sound" and it is represented by a mechanical disturbance that propagates in an
elastic means by sound waves with frequencies between 20 and 20,000 Hz. The characteristics of the noise can be
studied in the frequency domain through the relief of the oscillations induced on the molecules of the elastic means
of conduction. The noise, in addition to the harmonic content, can be classified depending on the nature of the
source (natural/artificial), intensity, changes over time (continuous, intermittent, fluctuating, and impulsive). The
work environment along with the external environment, the living environment and the habitat environment is one
of the four areas where environmental noise is generated. Each environment is characterized by three environmental
elements: the source, the space of propagation of sound waves and the receptors. Standards define, for each sector
and for each environmental element, the physical quantities related to the risk of pollution and noise, measurement
mode, the emission limit value of the sources, the exposure time for the areas and receptors, acts and territorial
actions of planning and specific skills. Specific weighting curves identified by the letters A, B, C and D is used in
the frequency domain to adapt the noise measured by an instrument to that perceived by the human ear. The curve A
is used for the work environments and it approximates the inverse of the isophonic curve of 40-phon; it attenuates
the low frequencies than high. International standards issued by ISO, in order to establish criteria and methods to
prevent and contain the "noise risk", have set specific dimensions to control and levels of acceptability. The most
important factors to check are: (i) the daily exposure of a worker ( ) and the weekly exposure of a worker
( )
The first factor, expressed in dB, refers at observation intervals of 8 hours per day and it represents the daily noise
exposure to which a worker is exposed. The safety limit of this factor is set at 87 dB. The daily exposure of a worker
is expressed as:
(4)

where
(5)

is the equivalent continuous A-weighted sound "A" [dB];

is the instantaneous value of the weighted sound pressure A [Pa];
is the reference sound pressure equal to 20 [Pa];
is the daily duration of exposure of a worker to noise [h];
is the duration of the work shift of 8 hours.

The second factor is the weekly average of daily values , evaluated on the number of days per week. For it the
safety limit is set at 87 dB.
is determined by the following formula if the working day per week are five:

(6)

where represents the values of for each of the n days per week.
In the international context the main rules governing the sector refer to that issued by ISO and IEC, while each
national Organization for Standardization shall adopt such rules and makes them applicable in the territories under
its jurisdiction. The individual sovereign states enact specific laws to attract and include the contents of international
standards and make them binding on the national territory (Brown et al., 1991; Sutton, 1976).

1057
3. Case Study
The company and the urban context under analysis is the Calabria Maceri, SpA, located in the south of Italy. The
company was founded in 1990 and operates in the recovery, recycling and disposal of Municipal Solid Waste
(MSW) and waste from commercial, craft, industrial and service. Within its manufacturing facilities Calabra Maceri
makes the screening and selection of waste. The transformation cycle was designed to obtain homogeneous
materials that can be used again in the industrial field. The company is extremely sensitive to both environmental
and quality aspects and it has obtained the certifications ISO 14001 and ISO 9001.
The main activities within the production system of Contrada Cutura concern:
• receiving and storage of waste;
• selection;
• recovery, packaging and shipping;
• the disposal of the non-recoverable.

The materials selected and trade by the company are: paper, plastics, ferrous materials, glass and aluminium.
Currently, Calabria Maceri implements the selection with semi-automatic mode or by making use of both processes
that do not need the human component and processes that make direct use of skilled labour. In each work shift are
involved about 30 workers. The current configuration of the processing cycle is showed in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Current configuration of the selection process

The production line used for the selection involves the following steps:
1. the product obtained from the separate collection of rubbish is conveniently deposited in special storage
areas.
2. using suitable mechanical means the waste is dispersed on the temporary parking areas.
3. an operator with suitable cutting tools manually "opens the bags" cutting the plastic bags containing the
waste.
4. one or more workers operate the first selection whose objective is to remove the bulky materials of size
greater than 25-30 cm.
5. the waste are conveyed, through the use of suitable mechanical means, in the vicinity of the conveyor belt
that feeds the selection station.
At the end of these steps, it’s operated the real process of screening and selecting. This process consists of two
sections: in the first section is made a manual selection (Figure 2a), while in the second section the selection is
automatic (Figure 2b).

1058
 Figure 2a: Multimaterial selection plant Figure 2b: Mixed packaging selection plant

6. Downstream of the manual selection area, the final automatic activities are operated. The waste still present
on the conveyor belt are subjected to the action of a magnetic deferrization. This apparatus, exploiting the
magnetic properties of an electro-magnet, attracts the ferrous materials moving them away from the rest of
the waste. Subsequently the residual materials are subjected to an intense stream of air, generated by an
aspirator that captures the materials of lower weight and conveys them inside a duct to be eliminated. If the
selection process is done correctly on the conveyor belt will be finally present only glass bottles and cans
that will be discharged into the collecting box.

After the selection phase, the materials obtained are suitably moved within the plant to be shredded and packaged.
The shredder and the compactor are showed respectively in Figure 3a and Figure 3b.

Figure 3a: Shredder Figure 3b: Compacting

Other contributions which increase the noise pollution are provided both by the means of transport used for the
collection of waste, both by the moving means employed to move the materials inside the plant. These noise sources
take place occasionally because they are focused only in some time periods. Additional permanent contribution is
made by selection activities and machineries. Therefore, the measurements to be performed must take into account
these aspects and they should be performed not only at certain points in the system but also in well detailed
moments.

4. Methodological Aspects
The dimensional characteristics of the plant in which the measurements were made are showed in Figure 4.
Structurally the plant was built of reinforced concrete with brick infill appropriately plastered. In addition to
vehicular and pedestrian accesses, in the exterior walls are present large windows to ensure a good flow of fresh air.
The roof is of type sheed with a height about eight meters; the floor is industrial with superficial wear. The
production machines are located in peripheral positions in order to allow ample manoeuvring space for the
movement means and appropriate areas for the temporary storage of the materials being processed. Depending on
1059
the type of work, the measuring points have been positioned as indicated in Figure 4. It should be noted that the
points identified by the numbers 2 and 3 represent fixed work locations because workers perform their tasks without
making significant shifts, while the positions indicated by the numbers 1 and 4 should be considered as mobile
stations because operation dealing these positions only temporarily (Moreland et al. 1976; Cheremisinoff 1996;
Cops 1985; Sutton 1968; Bettarello et al., 2010).
The noise recorded in Step 1 can be generated from the following causes:
• arrival of trucks and waste discharge;
• plant shredding on;
• compaction and active packaging system;
• cart for the handling of the materials in function;
• cardboard handling.
In particular, it was possible to perform measurements in the following conditions:
1. cart for the handling of the material active;
2. trucks arrival and waste discharge;
3. compacting plant active with handling of the carton by the cart;
4. compaction plant active.

Figure 4: Plant layout with the points of measurement

The noise recorded in Step 2 can be generated from the following causes:
• Handling waste conveyor belt inside the multi-material selection;
• Noise caused by the fall of various types of mixed materials in their containers.
The measurements were performed under the following conditions: (i) Pause working, in which the machine is
stopped; (ii) normal working conditions, with the conveyor belt on.
The noise recorded in Step 3 can be generated from the handling conveyor. In this case the measurements were
carried out under the following conditions:
– Pause working, in which the plant selection mixed packaging is stationary;
– Under normal working conditions, with a conveyor belt on.
The noise recorded in Step 4 can be generated from the following causes:
• Arrival of trucks and waste discharge;
1060
 • plant shredding on;
• Active packaging plant and compaction;
• Trolley for handling;
• Handling waste.
In this step measures take account:
1. Equipment off;
2. Shredding plant on;
3. Truck arrival and unloading waste, truck handling, packaging and compaction plant operating.
The measurements were made using a sound level meter SVAN 945th (BND309/310), suitable for statistical
analysis and precision Class 1. The essential characteristics of this instrument are: integrating sound level meter with
spectrum analyser sound in real time at 1/1 & 1/3 of octave, frequency band of 1 Hz - 20 kHz. The instrument has
been set with the following parameters:
• Measurement functions = 1/3 octave;
• Measure setup:
– Start delay = 2/2;
– Integration Time = time of measurement (depending on the type and extent of events to log);
– Buffer step = 1 second.
• Profile setup=3 profiles measured with A-weighting scale and functions slow, fast, and impulse.
In addition, in order to get accurate results, in the sound level meter were set the following parameters:
• Reference time : Day Period;
• Observation time : Period of time, within the reference time, during which has been I carry out the
monitoring and verification of the conditions of noise.
• Measurement time : Period of time, within the observation time during which were taken the noise
measures.
To verify the correctness of the measures, the instrument has been calibrated before and after each measurement
cycle in order to obtain deviations of measure included between ± 0.5 dB.
The sound level meter was positioned about 1.5 m above the ground, from a distance of more than one meter from
the noise source and at about 0.5 m from the ear of the operator. The instrument was launched and left in position
for the whole measurement time expected.
The most important parameter to be measured and analysed is the equivalent level of daily exposure of workers
. For the precautions taken in the measurement and for the duration of the measure, the value of
measured by the sound level meter will correspond with the level of daily exposure of workers. Because the work
period is formed by 8 hours, there is not need to add any correction factor.

5. Analysis, Results and Conclusions

In this section are showed the result of the measures. The authors focused particular attention to measurements made
in Step 2, at the location occupied by the plant operators to multi material selection. As specified in Tables 2 and 3,
the measurements were carried out at different times and in various operating conditions.

Table 2. Operating conditions for the measures in Step 2

Date 14/10/2011 Tr = Period daytime
Time 9:32:48 To = 7 hours (07:00 -14:00);
Under normal working conditions with belt latch

Table 3. Operating conditions for the measures in Step 2

Date 14/10/2011 Tr = Period daytime
Time 10:28:40 To = 7 hours (07:00 -14:00);
Under normal working conditions with the active conveyor belt

The first measurement was carried out during a work break when the conveyor belt was on, while the second
measure refers to conditions of full operability, such as when the conveyor belt is active. Tables 4 and 5 show

1061
respectively the numerical values recorded by the instrument during the tests for the three profiles of measurement,
while the graphs of Figure 5 and Figure 6 show the time course of these values.

Table 4. Values of the measured noise for the three profiles at the point n ° 2 (conveyor belt off)
Profile Filter Time Units Peak Min Max Spl Leq Ltm3 Ltm5 SEL Lden
Measure
ment
1 A 0.03.00 dB 78,7 50,7 61,6 52,4 53,8 55,2 55,9 76,4 53,8
2 A 0.03.00 dB 78,7 49,7 66,5 52,9 53,8 57,4 58,6 76,4 53,8
3 A 0.03.00 dB 78,7 50,6 67,6 53,6 53,8 59,2 60,5 76,4 53,8

Figure 5: Temporal trend of the three profiles of measurement in the case of stopped conveyor belt

Table 5. Values of the measured noise for the three profiles in Step 2 (conveyor belt off)
Profile Filter Time Units Peak Min Max Spl Leq Ltm3 Ltm5 SEL Lden
measurement
1 A 0.03.00 dB 117,8 71 91,9 82,7 83,3 86,8 87,8 105,9 83,3
2 A 0.03.00 dB 117,8 65,8 98,5 86,8 83,3 91,8 93,5 105,9 83,3
3 A 0.03.00 dB 117,8 73,9 101,9 90,8 83,3 95,8 96,9 105,9 83,3

1062
 Figure 6: Temporal trend of the three profiles of measurement in the case of conveyor belt operating

The analysis of the results shows that for the first measure the equivalent noise level is equal to 53.8 dB, but there
are both an impulsive and tonal components as highlighted by the spectral analysis performed by bands in 1/3 of
octave. For the presence of these components, the results are corrected with an increment of 6 dB. The correction
leads to achieve a total value of 59.8 dB. This value is located below the danger threshold.
For the second measure the equivalent noise level is equal to 83.3 dB. Because of tonal components and impulsive
components the equivalent noise level is of 89.3 dB. This value exceeds the limits of dangerousness.
For each measurement point was performed four measurements in order to take account of the different operating
conditions that may occur. The numerical synthesis of all the measurements carried out is shown in Table 6.

Table 6. Values of the measured noise at the observation point (dB)

Measure 1 Measure 2 Measure 3 Measure 4
Point 1 71,1 83,3 78,2 81,8
Point 2 59,8 89,3 62,5 90,8
Point 3 72,1 78,6 75,2 82,7
Point 4 75,3 83,6 78,7 82,9

The data analysis shows that the safety limits are exceeded only at the measuring point 2 when all the equipment
works at full capacity. To obtain more information the measurements were repeated by significantly increasing the
observation interval from 3 to 30 minutes. The results to which it leads, unfortunately, do not differ from the initial
ones and then confirm the presence of unacceptable working conditions.

1063
The solutions proposed to bring the system within the limits imposed by the rules are twofold: organizational and
structural. From the organizational point of view is necessary to avoid the simultaneous use of equipment and
machinery therein, to make more frequent shifts of workers in order to reduce the exposure period, and finally
giving the workers themselves the necessary devices personal protective equipment to reduce the sound vibrations.
From the structural point of view it is necessary to install sound-absorbing panels along the side walls in sheet to
absorb the sound waves generated by the machining. In addition, because the replacement of machines currently
used is impossible, it is necessary to improve the efficiency of sound: through maintenance operations carried out
frequently and the use of substances able to reduce the coefficients of friction of the moving parts, it is possible to
limit the noise that is generated by mechanical contact and vibration.

In conclusion, it should be noted that the values of noise measured in the other measuring points are substantially
below the regulatory limits and the operating conditions that have generated them are occasional and not repeatable
with continuity over the entire work shift. This reduces significantly the time interval of exposure and therefore
greatly limits the risk to workers.

References
1. Alton E.F., “Master Handbook, Acoustics”, McGraw-Hill, 2001.
2. Bettarello F., Fausti P., Baccan V., Caniato M., Impact Sound Pressure Level Performances of Basic Beam
Floor Structures, Building Acoustic, Vol. 17, no. 3, 2010, pp. 305-316.
3. Brown P. J., Yearout R. D., Impacts of leisure activity noise levels on safety procedures and policy in the
industrial environment, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol.7, no. 4, pp. 341-346, July
1991.
4. Çelik O., Yalçın Ş., Öztürk A., Hearing parameters in noise exposed industrial workers, Auris Nasus
Larynx, Vol.25, no. 4, pp. 369-375, December 1998.
5. Cheremisinoff N. P., Industrial noise control - An overview, Noise Control in Industry, pp. 17-34, 1996.
6. Cocchi A., Fausti P., Piva S., Experimental characterisation of the Low Frequency noise annoyanche
arising from industrial plants. Journal of Low Frequency Noise and Vibration, Vol. 11, pp. 124-132, 1992.
7. Cops A., Absorption properties of baffles for noise control in industrial halls, Applied Acoustics, Vol. 18,
no. 6, pp. 435-448, 1985.
8. International Organization for Standardization, ISO/R 1999/1990, Acoustics, Determination of
occupational noise exposure and estimation of noise-induced hearing impairment.
9. Kaliakatsos D., Mirabelli G., Pizzuti T., La sicurezza nei luoghi di lavoro, aspetti metodologici per la
misura del rumore, Tutto Misure anno XXIII, no. 4, pp. 271 – 276, 2011,
10. Mattei J., Planning for noise control of new industrial plant, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 4, no. 2,
pp. 249-255, September 1966.
11. Moreland J.B., Minto R.F., An example of in-plant noise reduction with an acoustical barrier, Applied
Acoustics, Vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 205-214, July 1976.
12. Sutton P., Process plant noise: Evaluation and control, Applied Acoustics, Vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 17-33, January
1976.
13. Sutton P., Design of a noise specification for process plant, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 8, no. 1,
pp. 33-43, July 1968.

1064